This post is going to stir up some hornets. I don't know if I am being judgmental or not. Perhaps I should just keep it to myself...but I can't and that's why I am posting it here. Lately, ever since the unfortunate earthquake incident near Taiwan which resulted in the disruption of internet service in Asia, local newspaper The Star has been writing a few articles about bloggers and how their blogging life has been affected by the disruption. That's fine.
I also noticed that there has been more than one interview by The Star with a particular female blogger (should I say she's young? Well, she's much younger than me) wherein the interviews were published on at least three different issues since the disruption started. That's fine.
However, curiosity got to me. This female blogger was named and her website published in the paper. So, I went to the website. She's attractive and the site is nicely laid out. But you see, what I find uncomfortable was the fact that her site has much about consumption of alcohol and there are occasional profanities. I don't have any issue with how she blogs about her life. She has lots of readers.
However, I feel that The Star could have highlighted some other blogger instead. Perhaps one without profanities? I mean, by their highlighting of the blog in their paper which is read by millions, they should and ought to know that there will be many people including kids who will actually go to that link.
Call me old-fashioned or out of touch. Call me a moral guardian if you must. Call me whatever names if you must. Unless you can tell me honestly that blogging is only for one's personal gratification / satisfaction and it is not meant to be read by anyone else. Let's face it. People blog and expect people to read it. Perhaps, it is only meant for 1 reader. Perhaps, the intention is that it be read by as many people as possible. If it is not meant to be read by anyone else, why publish on the net? One might as well just keep it as a Word file safely kept in the pc.
So, does it mean that one can blog just about anything with a "I could not care less what you think" attitude? Perhaps yes to some. But in reality, what we blog about can have an influence in the thoughts and lives of others. Unless you can tell me honestly that you do not believe that the contents of your blog will ever influence the thoughts or lives of others. Let's be real. I think even Kenny Sia realised that he should (and he has) tone down his blog to suit the younger audience. That's responsibility.
The biggest internet user in coming years (or perhaps currently) are probably those below 40 years old. This is the internet generation. Secondary school students, kids in primary school and perhaps even kindie kids use the internet regularly. Yes, I admit that they have full access to so many other unwholesome and nasty sites. Hence the need for cyberpatrol softwares and such.
But as bloggers, being amateur and some professional publishers in our own right, we ought to be responsible for our actions. And that goes to The Star as well.
I also noticed that there has been more than one interview by The Star with a particular female blogger (should I say she's young? Well, she's much younger than me) wherein the interviews were published on at least three different issues since the disruption started. That's fine.
However, curiosity got to me. This female blogger was named and her website published in the paper. So, I went to the website. She's attractive and the site is nicely laid out. But you see, what I find uncomfortable was the fact that her site has much about consumption of alcohol and there are occasional profanities. I don't have any issue with how she blogs about her life. She has lots of readers.
However, I feel that The Star could have highlighted some other blogger instead. Perhaps one without profanities? I mean, by their highlighting of the blog in their paper which is read by millions, they should and ought to know that there will be many people including kids who will actually go to that link.
Call me old-fashioned or out of touch. Call me a moral guardian if you must. Call me whatever names if you must. Unless you can tell me honestly that blogging is only for one's personal gratification / satisfaction and it is not meant to be read by anyone else. Let's face it. People blog and expect people to read it. Perhaps, it is only meant for 1 reader. Perhaps, the intention is that it be read by as many people as possible. If it is not meant to be read by anyone else, why publish on the net? One might as well just keep it as a Word file safely kept in the pc.
So, does it mean that one can blog just about anything with a "I could not care less what you think" attitude? Perhaps yes to some. But in reality, what we blog about can have an influence in the thoughts and lives of others. Unless you can tell me honestly that you do not believe that the contents of your blog will ever influence the thoughts or lives of others. Let's be real. I think even Kenny Sia realised that he should (and he has) tone down his blog to suit the younger audience. That's responsibility.
The biggest internet user in coming years (or perhaps currently) are probably those below 40 years old. This is the internet generation. Secondary school students, kids in primary school and perhaps even kindie kids use the internet regularly. Yes, I admit that they have full access to so many other unwholesome and nasty sites. Hence the need for cyberpatrol softwares and such.
But as bloggers, being amateur and some professional publishers in our own right, we ought to be responsible for our actions. And that goes to The Star as well.
